Postprandial symptoms in disorders of gut-brain interaction and their potential as a treatment target

Postprandial, or meal-related, symptoms, such as abdominal pain, early satiation, fullness or bloating, are often reported by patients with disorders of gut-brain interaction, including functional dyspepsia (FD) or irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). We propose that postprandial symptoms arise via a distinct pathophysiological process. A physiological or psychological insult, for example, acute enteric infection, leads to loss of tolerance to a previously tolerated oral food antigen. This enables interaction of both the microbiota and the food antigen itself with the immune system, causing a localised immunological response, with activation of eosinophils and mast cells, and release of inflammatory mediators, including histamine and cytokines. These have more widespread systemic effects, including triggering nociceptive nerves and altering mood. Dietary interventions, including a diet low in fermentable oligosaccharides, disaccharides, monosaccharides and polyols, elimination of potential food antigens or gluten, IgG food sensitivity diets or salicylate restriction may benefit some patients with IBS or FD. This could be because the restriction of these foods or dietary components modulates this pathophysiological process. Similarly, drugs including proton pump inhibitors, histamine-receptor antagonists, mast cell stabilisers or even tricyclic or tetracyclic antidepressants, which have anti-histaminergic actions, all of which are potential treatments for FD and IBS, act on one or more of these mechanisms. It seems unlikely that food antigens driving intestinal immune activation are the entire explanation for postprandial symptoms in FD and IBS. In others, fermentation of intestinal carbohydrates, with gas release altering reflex responses, adverse reactions to food chemicals, central mechanisms or nocebo effects may dominate. However, if the concept that postprandial symptoms arise from food antigens driving an immune response in the gastrointestinal tract in a subset of patients is correct, it is paradigm-shifting, because if the choice of treatment were based on one or more of these therapeutic targets, patient outcomes may be improved

Is upper gastrointestinal radiography a cost-effective alternative to a Helicobacter pylori “Test and Treat” strategy for patients with suspected peptic ulcer disease?

Current clinical consensus supports an initial Helicobacter pylori (HP) “test and treat” approach when compared to immediate endoscopy for patients with suspected peptic ulcer disease. Alternative diagnostic approaches that incorporate upper GI radiography (UGI) have not been previously evaluated. We sought to determine the cost effectiveness of UGI compared to a HP test and treat strategy, incorporating recent data addressing the reduced prevalence of HP, lower cost of diagnostic interventions, and reduced attribution of PUD to HP. METHODS : Using decision analysis, three diagnostic and treatment strategies were evaluated: 1) Test and Treat —initial HP serology, treat patients who test positive with HP eradication and antiulcer therapy; 2) Initial UGI series —treat all patients with documented ulcer disease with HP eradication and antiulcer therapy; and 3) Initial UGI series, HP serology if ulcer present — treat ulcer and HP based on diagnostic test results. RESULTS : The estimated cost per ulcer cured for each strategy were as follows: test and treat, $3,025; initial UGI,$3,690; and UGI with serology, $3,790. The estimated cost per patient treatment were: test and treat,$498; initial UGI, $610; and UGI with serology,$620. When UGI reimbursement was decreased to less than $50, the UGI strategies yielded a lower cost per patient treated than the test and treat strategy. CONCLUSION : At the current level of reimbursement, UGI should not be considered a cost-effective alternative to the HP test and treat strategy for the initial evaluation of patients with suspected peptic ulcer disease.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/73722/1/j.1572-0241.2000.01837.x.pd

Lack of effect of treating Helicobacter pylori infection in patients with nonulcer dyspepsia. Omeprazole plus Clarithromycin and Amoxicillin Effect One Year after Treatment (OCAY) Study Group.

It is uncertain whether treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection relieves symptoms in patients with nonulcer, or functional, dyspepsia. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, multicenter trial of patients with H. pylori infection and dyspeptic symptoms (moderate-to-very-severe pain and discomfort centered in the upper abdomen). Patients were excluded if they had a history of peptic ulcer disease or gastroesophageal reflux disease and had abnormal findings on upper endoscopy. Patients were randomly assigned to seven days of treatment with 20 mg of omeprazole twice daily, 1000 mg of amoxicillin twice daily, and 500 mg of clarithromycin twice daily or with omeprazole alone and then followed up for one year. Treatment success was defined as the absence of dyspeptic symptoms or the presence of minimal symptoms on any of the 7 days preceding the 12-month visit. RESULTS: Twenty of the 348 patients were excluded after randomization because they were not infected with H. pylori, were not treated, or had no data available. For the remaining 328 patients (164 in each group), treatment was successful for 27.4 percent of those assigned to receive omeprazole and antibiotics and 20.7 percent of those assigned to receive omeprazole alone (P=0.17; absolute difference between groups, 6.7 percent; 95 percent confidence interval, -2.6 to 16.0). After 12 months, gastritis had healed in 75.0 percent of the patients in the group given omeprazole and antibiotics and in 3.0 percent of the patients in the omeprazole group (P<0.001); the respective rates of H. pylori eradication were 79 percent and 2 percent. In the group given omeprazole and antibiotics, the rate of treatment success among patients with persistent H. pylori infection was similar to that among patients in whom the infection was eradicated (26 percent vs. 31 percent). There were no significant differences between the groups in the quality of life after treatment. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with nonulcer dyspepsia, the eradication of H. pylori infection is not likely to relieve symptoms

Systematic review with meta-analysis: Effects of probiotic supplementation on symptoms in functional dyspepsia

The pathophysiology of functional dyspepsia (FD) remains poorly understood, but alterations of the small intestinal microbiome have been observed. The place of probiotics in treatment is uncertain. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the currently available randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the potential beneficial effects and risks of probiotics in FD. Pubmed, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register were searched (up to May 2019) for RCTs evaluating the effects of probiotic supplementation compared to placebo in adults with FD. Two reviewers independently assessed eligibility, trial quality and extracted information from identified articles. To compare the effects of probiotics with placebo, risk ratios (RRs) with 95 confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled using random effects models. Six trials, including 422 participants were included but only three RCTs could be included in the meta-analysis. Lactobacillus strains showed potential positive effects in terms of improving upper gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms in patients with FD. Probiotic supplementation tended to improve global dyspepsia score (n = 3 RCTs, risk ratio RR: 1.35, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.84; P = 0.061) and bacterial composition in the GI tract. Probiotics were well tolerated without any serious adverse events. While the available data suggest that supplementation with probiotics may improve GI symptoms in patients with FD, the evidence is insufficient to draw clear conclusions regarding efficacy. Thus, high-quality RCTs are needed to establish the beneficial effects of probiotic supplementation on FD outcomes. © 2020 The Author

Diabetic gastroparesis: Therapeutic options

Gastroparesis is a condition characterized by delayed gastric emptying and the most common known underlying cause is diabetes mellitus. Symptoms include nausea, vomiting, abdominal fullness, and early satiety, which impact to varying degrees on the patient’s quality of life. Symptoms and deficits do not necessarily relate to each other, hence despite significant abnormalities in gastric emptying, some individuals have only minimal symptoms and, conversely, severe symptoms do not always relate to measures of gastric emptying. Prokinetic agents such as metoclopramide, domperidone, and erythromycin enhance gastric motility and have remained the mainstay of treatment for several decades, despite unwanted side effects and numerous drug interactions. Mechanical therapies such as endoscopic pyloric botulinum toxin injection, gastric electrical stimulation, and gastrostomy or jejunostomy are used in intractable diabetic gastroparesis (DG), refractory to prokinetic therapies. Mitemcinal and TZP-101 are novel investigational motilin receptor and ghrelin agonists, respectively, and show promise in the treatment of DG. The aim of this review is to provide an update on prokinetic and mechanical therapies in the treatment of DG

Editorial: Disruption of the Microbiota-Gut-Brain Axis in Functional Dyspepsia and Gastroparesis: Mechanisms and Clinical Implications

Lucas Wauters, Hui Li, and Nicholas J. Talle

Sociodemographic and lifestyle factors associated with constipation in an elderly Asian community

10.1111/j.1572-0241.1999.01078.xAmerican Journal of Gastroenterology9451283-1291AJGA